Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Ford Ranger III
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
-I agree with dannyg in that just a 4 cyl and one 6 cylinder engine option are needed. If they boost the 6 to 250hp+, who needs a V8?
-maybe a diesel for those interested (not me!)
-Make the engines all aluminum to save weight.
-6 speed manual transmission.
-Increase in size just slightly, keep the weight the same. I would love to see a 6.5 foot box - that extra 6 inches is very handy for hauling stuff (snowmobiles fit better).
-A composite box - at least the inside. This would eliminate the need for bedliners.
-offer a sport 2wd package on 4x2 RC and SC, with Recaro like seats (can you say SVT Ranger?).
-aluminum wheels on 4x2 like they used to.
-offer a high-end stereo with sub on all models, Regular cab and Super cab.
-Factory sunroof option like Toyota, Nissan.
Well, that's it for now.
The Toyota Prius is a hybrid--its electric engine develops only 40hp but a whopping 225 ft. lb of torque from 0-400 RPM (!). All that torque at low RPMs would be great for pulling boat trailers up launching ramps, 4x4ing, etc. Combine that with the new 2.3L's 140hp and 155 ft.lb and you've got a pretty potent combination: 180hp and lots of torque.
Plus much better MPG.
Check out http://prius.toyota.com/technology/electric.html for more info.
I hear Ford is already developing this system for the Escape which will get the 2.3L at some point. I hope they offer it on the Ranger too.
The Vulcan 3.0L will continue through the 2002 model year Ranger, although some production might spill over into early 2003 models. 2000 will be the last year for the 3.0L FFV Ranger.
The Vulcan 3.0L will be replaced by an I-5 cylinder engine for Ranger/B-series light truck applications. BlueOvalNews was the first publication to first report the existence of the I5 back on 21 July 1999 .
While the Ford Ranger will use the 2.8L I5, the Ranger's Mazda cousin will use a 2.7L version of the I5.
From 2002 forward the only V6 engine to be offered in the Ranger will be the 4.0L V6. The Koln 4.0L V6 has some temporary safety and will even receive an upgrade within the next few years. We'll cover the fate of the 4.0L when we publish information on the 2003+ Explorer. We expect that the 3.0L Vulcan 3.0 will be completely discontinued from both the car and truck lines by 2003.
Gone with the Vulcan is the 4R44E automatic transmission. It will be replaced by the 5R55E, also in 2002. The R1 manual transmission will remain in use through 2003.
Also on the chopping block is the 2.5L I4 cylinder engine. 2001 will be the last year in which the 2.5L will be used when a new 2.3L I4 replaces it as well. Both will use the same transmissions as the I5.
I-5 sounds kind of funny though? Why not an I-6 like Chevy is doing? Hope to see a diesel too.
Still don't hear from anyone how Ford will update the Ranger? I understand it will get the Explorer's old engine - soon to be base engine for the Explorer - the SOHC 4.0, same old engine with a newer design. Sounds like GM to me? Is that really a big step forward?
Face it - an old engine design, updated a few years ago to keep the Explorer competitive. Now, the Explorer gets a nice new and small V-8 in a few months - where has the new Ranger engine been?
I follow Ford closely - have owned many of their vehicles, mostly with very good results. Own two F-series trucks now and I must say I am most happy with both. But, where is the good technology in the Ranger? Had a new Ranger (1998) with very poor results - 4.0 engine woes. A new chassis would have allowed the really nice 4.6 OHC engine from the base F-150 to be an option and probably make an incredible competitor to the Dodge Dakota with the V-8. They have missed this one - one of the first I have ever seen Ford miss with trucks.
I truly like the hybrid idea - it will have to be a good car design before it works as a truck. And, that is where the Escape comes to view - it's really a car with nice Taurus engine. But, then maybe that is the direction the Ranger is going. In my mind, it is not going in the direction of a good compact truck. We need a Dakota competitor to keep up with the Ranger's original design theme - a very durable, compact truck that works hard as a pickup but also delivers the best value on the planet.
As far as the SOHC 4.0 being "old" its only been int he Explorer for about 3 years, 4 tops. The SOHC 4.0 is no slouch either. To develop an engine solely for the Ranger would cost serious dollars in development/parts/support you name it. I feel its smart of Ford to offer this engine. It fits perfect into this truck class. A V8 Ranger is overkill in my book. If I want a V8 I would go to a full size. I have a 4.0 V6 and it has pulled, hauled and towed everything I have asked of it..
The Ranger would be perfect for a hybrid gas/electric like they're developing for the 2003 Escape. If this system was available today at a reasonable cost I'd consider it.
A casualty of this seems to have been the choice of rear end in the 4x2 Rangers.
I cannot pick the gearing or whether I want Limited Slip Differential . . . and I do! Maybe they'll offer it later, but I wouldn't expect that, so I'm going ahead anyway. Dammit. I'll be investing in some sand bags for this winter I guess.
They do offer LSD on the 4x4 2001 Ranger, however. So close . . . yet so far.
And I'm getting the 4x2 with the 4.0/auto (which you can only get in one fully loaded package) - I can only hope that the 3.55 that I'm forced to get helps with the fuel consumption.
List price, top of the line Toyota Tacoma 4x4 extended cab -- around $28K.
Of course that's not all of the cost involved. The Ranger, for example, would need serious cash investment (another $2-3K worth), such as new tires, new wheels, airlockers for the differentials, etc. to make it a serious off-road machine, while the Tacoma is a serious off-road machine as-is. But even so, the $$$ is enough to make me seriously look at the Ranger, despite the poor quality, old engine design, etc. I don't plan on doing serious off-roading in a $20K+ pickup truck anyhow -- I may be a highly paid computer professional, but not to the point where I can afford to destroy $20K toys on jeep trails!
For those complaining about the lack of development dollars put into the Ranger: Ford could afford to hike the price of the Ranger and make it a state-of-the-art small truck. Or even state-of-1995 small truck (the Tacoma was introduced in 1995). But that is not what they sell the Ranger as. They sell it as a cheaper alternative to things like the Tacoma and Dodge Dakota, and apparently it's working, because the Ranger remains the best-selling small truck.
Personally I prefer the Nissan Frontier. Not quite as uncomfortable as the Tacoma, not quite as bloated as the Ranger. Alas, I seem alone in that opinion. I am reluctant to purchase a truck that seems as seriously snubbed by truck aficiandos as the Frontier is. If I'm interested in after-market goodies for my truck (hey, a boy has to have his toys :-), well, I gotta have a truck that other people like to buy goodies for... Frontiers appear to be bought by rather prim folks looking for bare-bones functionality out on the ranch, whose idea of a truck accessory is a load of firewood. Maybe the new XTerra-derived look for 2001 will change that. But at the moment, that's still speculation.
-E
And referring to the off-road capabilities of the Ranger (e l green), there's the new off-road version coming out 1Q 01 that will be trail-ready right off the line. Not hard-core, but enough for your average joe.
James
I really only want a 2wd, and they will have one in soon. Both 2wd (3.55) and 4wd (3.73) 4.0L trucks here in Canada come standard with Limited Slip axles.
The worst part is that the Ford dealer is giving me a good deal because of various reasons, and I wouldn't be likely to get it at a Mazda dealer. And I prefer the Ford styling, but this revelation is making me stop to consider things again. Dammit.
I guess I'll never know how much I need that LSD until I get the truck without it. I'll probably go see if the Mazda dealer can compete much more price-wise, and if not I'll go place my order at Ford. Any thoughts?
You will also see on ford.ca that we can get the Ranger XLT 4x2 Regular Cab with the 4.0L SOHC and 5-speed. Could definitely go out hunting for Dakota R/Ts with one of these babies!
I just figure I'd be better off saving the cash than spending a ton on stuff I don't need and a style I don't like with the Mazda. Maybe I should go to Canada to get the Ranger I want!
I think maybe I'll be holding on to my '95 until the next redesign in 2003.
This offroad pkg is going to be awesome. Much more functional for the everyday user than the Toyota TRD package. So many people by this package unaware of what a locker is or does and that it can only be engaged in 4low and when its not engaged its an open axle. The LSD is much more functional for everyday use.
Leo dC
Nope, I would have liked that set-up, too, but Ford will only let you have the 4.0L in the 4x4 Edge, or in an XLT.
You may want to consider the Mazda clone. You can get what you want (mostly) with the "Dual Sport" package. 2wd, 4.0L, LSD, Auto and 4 door. Personally, I don't like the look of the Mazda, and I was able to get a great deal on a Ford, but this may be right for you.
I also have found that Ford will only let me have the 4.10 LSD with my 4.0L, so you may have problems getting the 3.55 LSD. However, I'm getting a 4x4.
I considered an F-150 with a LSD, but settled on a 4x4 Ranger, for $1,500 cheaper and easier manueverability. After all, I have a dump truck I can use to haul big loads, and the wife's car for multiple people (I've carried more than one passenger in my car about a dozen times in three years, so I don't see the extra room in the F-150 as critical).
So the dealer is building me a 2001 Ranger XLT with the 4.0L, the 5 speed Auto, Extended Cab, Power Package and the 4.10 Limited Slip. I actually had them try to order the 3.73 Limited Slip, but they said that Ford would only put that on the 3.0L engine.
I decided I'd rather have the extra expense up front and in insurance to get the Limited Slip and the 4x4 and better resale value. (In my area, everyone is convinced that they MUST HAVE 4x4, and these trucks sell amazingly quick, regardless of condition, while 2wd trucks take a long, long time to sell). I still wish I could have gotten a regular old 2wd Ranger with a LSD, but Ford's scheme worked, and they got me to spend more money than I planned. Still, I'm better off than if I'd gotten a Nissan Frontier, 2wd LSD, since I got a great deal and lotsa power.
Sorry about the long post, but if you look back through the postings you may realize that this was a long, painful process to get to this point! And now all I have to do I sell my car to avoid getting screwed on trade-in.
David
Leo dC
As I understand it, the payload is somewhat dependant on the build of the truck, but also the spring/shock set-up. The Mazda can't be much different than the Ford, I'd think, and maybe with aftermarket suspension bits you can make up the difference.
Stopped by my dealer, and he claimed, "No, when we had problems putting in your [4x4] order last night [because I wanted the 3.73 LSD, and the 4.0L 4x4 requires the 4.10 LSD], we tried your original 2wd LSD combination and the computer wouldn't take it." Well, that was hard to believe - why would he try my old order again? It sounded like something he made up on the spot, but who knows for sure. I said fine, but since I had doubts, I called his competitor who I'd been talking to, and had him try to build me my 2wd LSD combo.
Guess what? He was able to do it. 4.0L, auto, XLT, all the trimmings and the 3.55 LSD. So I got his price and called the dealer where the 4x4 is ordered and told him (since the order is about a day old) that I'd be coming in today to write up a new order for a 2wd! If he messes with me I'll go to his competitor, even though that'll be a bit of a trip in comparison. I'm just glad I found out that I could build the truck I originally wanted before I had spent a bunch more cash on the 4x4. Talk about a roller-caoster ride.
The Ranger is available in about 20 different combinations. This is what makes the Ranger so popular.
I was looking at trucks for a while and narrowed it down to the Ranger as a good value, especially at $4,700 below MSRP (including the factory rebate).
Right now, I'm trying to get used to riding so high off the ground (nice to see so far ahead, though) and the stirring, which I find a little too stiff for my liking. Otherwise, I like it a lot...have received a few complements from strangers already. The 4-door super cab sure comes in handy for putting in groceries, etc.